What defines a "limited pivot" or "undynamic pivot"

[Lindsey Newman]

It's just a matter of what a golf swing is trying to accomplish. Obviously, if length is trying to be obtained then you make a full turn with hips shoulders and maybe even a higher deeper arm swing. Long drive contests swings are a good example. Golf as we know is both a game of distance and accuracy, so then some measures of control are necessary. We all want both and swings like lia showed are good examples. Restricting range of motion to the point of reduced length is a deterrent to optimum and it's all subjective.

 

[Brian Manzella]

<iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/22375363?portrait=0" width="640" height="480" frameborder="0"></iframe>

 

[lia41985]

Brian,
Could you talk more about your experience with Rob Neal? What do you mean by "more hip slide"?

Andy,
You may not think so but I think that maintaining the bent-ness in the right wright and the flatness of the left wrist for as long as you're favorite instructors prescribe is tantamount to steering. For example:

He let go of the golf club ?! RT @HankDHaney: Just saw a replay of Phil's swing and it was the best swing I have ever seen him make

http://twitter.com/nickstarchuk/status/54269469492641792

@HankDHaney First U say U couldn't fix TW's swing today &the Phil-swivel-flip is his best ever? hi! I'm the line of compression.Have we met?

http://twitter.com/nickstarchuk/status/54270788639010816

 

[westy]

That's the funniest thing about all of this; the check swingers think they're actually bombers.

they are, they are bombing it from there with what they are employing.

 

[westy]

What are the components of the golf swing that make a swing "undynamic" or also makes it a "limited pivot"?

Any component that is restricted inside its potential. (potential defined either as maximal or optimal), or gets used poorly. (includes every single "component)
"or also";
"limited pivot" would be defined as limiting the pivot, so anything included in your definition of the pivot is, "limited"......
You limit things with your mind.
you body only has so much to give.
unless you train it. even if you train it.

 

[macduffer]

Limited pivot:
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/vbvc9Tc87dQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Non-limited pivot:
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/5N9tYyhaDrw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Non-dynamic swing:
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ozSq3nsaF_o" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Dynamic swing:
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/9e-FQbMWfok" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Charlie hits it exactly the same length off the tee as VJ, as does Lovemark, and both (albeit marginally) are longer than Adam Scott. Charl Schwartzel is 1 (one) yard longer.

Does that not imply they are as 'dynamic', albeit perhaps according to a different definition of the term?

 

[birdie_man]

Interesting. Longer per the PGA driving stats?

Or longer hitting club for club?

I would put my money on Scott over Charlie Wi in a LD comp any day. I could be very wrong.

It is an honest question though. Some guys hit 3 woods off the tee, etc.

 

[ej20]

Charlie hits it exactly the same length off the tee as VJ, as does Lovemark, and both (albeit marginally) are longer than Adam Scott. Charl Schwartzel is 1 (one) yard longer.

Does that not imply they are as 'dynamic', albeit perhaps according to a different definition of the term?

Not a good argument.VJ is well past his best years and has lost distance.He was one of the longest on tour and could hang with Tiger for distance.

Lovemark could also be one heck of an athlete and who knows he could belt it 30 yards farther with a more dynamic pivot.

A better indication for power is looking at the longest hitters in the world.You won't find too many restricted pivots in long drivers and the longest players on tour.

 

[macduffer]

Not a good argument.VJ is well past his best years and has lost distance.He was one of the longest on tour and could hang with Tiger for distance.

Lovemark could also be one heck of an athlete and who knows he could belt it 30 yards farther with a more dynamic pivot.

A better indication for power is looking at the longest hitters in the world.You won't find too many restricted pivots in long drivers and the longest players on tour.

1) I agree that VJ is past his best. Yet he was the example chosen by lia, not me.

2) Who knows if Lovemark would hit it further with a different method? Maybe, maybe not: that is pure speculation.

3) If we look at long drivers, they may well swing differently. But the requirements of LD are very different from actually playing golf. There has, in playing a course, to be an element of control.

4) I also have to take issue with this idea of 'restricted'. S&T, Morad etc specifically focus on several things to allow a greater hip turn and a deeper arm swing. That's the opposite of restricted, isn't it?

 

[BrendanC]

Wonder what type of swing Ricky Fowler was doing in that video. Must read this Golf Digest article (I know, I know): very relevant to this thread. He outlines his two approaches to driving.

Quoting Ricky Fowler:

"1 (Power) At the top, I want most of my weight shifted to my right side, maybe 70 or 80 percent (1). With the big shoulder turn I've made, my head has moved significantly behind the ball (2). From here, I feel I can just step on the gas. It's go time! How far back I move my head is a matter of timing that varies day to day. If I'm feeling super on, I shift back real far.

"2 (Control) Just like in the setup, I want to feel centered over the ball at the top (1). Notice how my head has nudged only slightly back from address. No more than 60 percent of my weight is on my right leg (2)."

Read More Rickie Fowler: My Keys To Great Driving: Golf Digest

 

[macduffer]

A proposed experiment: from a 'limited' swing to a 'dynamic' one.

Brian's thread on the above subject seems to have caused some controversy, particularly on another forum (mods, I haven't linked - if it's appropriate I will).

It very much seems the 2 'camps' are convinced that 'their' way is the best, though I am aware that Brian teaches multiple patterns/on an individual basis.

To clarify, I am a 'stack and tilter'. I am currently experiencing mixed, if generally good results. I use the system because it limits my fat shots, which historically have been my greatest problem. Despite (briefly) reaching an 8 handicap, I have never been better than 'very average' in terms of iron play. I now feel I also understand what's going on in my swing.

However, I am not 'ideologically' devoted to the method, nor mentally closed to other 'systems', though I recognise the limited nature of that term.

So I propose an experiment. If any of the teachers here think that they can improve my ball striking by giving me a 'dynamic' style, I am all ears. In fact, Brian agreed to give a skype/video lesson last year, but I never heard back from him. That was a pity (for me, at least - Brian possibly had a lucky escape).

I will post some current video (when I have some, hopefully in the next 48 hours), and I await any thoughts/responses.

PS - this was posted in a friendly, open-minded spirit, and to help show that the SnT 'camp' are not as some portray them to be. It would hence be a real disappointment to be flamed.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Another answer...

<iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/22376976?portrait=0" width="640" height="480" frameborder="0"></iframe>

 

[spmurph]

Every golf swing I teach has weight going to the back foot.

You don't teach S&T?

 

[StableAxis]

You don't teach S&T?

you should watch Brians videos on the pivot.

 

[macduffer]

I note my thread/proposed experiment has been moved. Any reason why?

 

[spmurph]

you should watch Brians videos on the pivot.

I have. Thanks for answering my question. I'm curious because of your original response about the type of pivot you teach contradicts what I read in the S&T book.

 

[eugd]

you should watch Brians videos on the pivot
.


which video are you talking about I have NSA, NHA, COFF and SD. which one are you referring to?

 

[lia41985]

Another answer...

<iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/22376976?portrait=0" width="640" height="480" frameborder="0"></iframe>

Thanks for the explanation. I really liked the ending where you talked about the possible dawn of a Trackman era with individualized swings that don't particularly adhere to any certain model. Wasn't that the point of The Golfing Machine? It's so strange that so many of these methodologies share that lineage with your own approach Brian and yet it's like that main lesson from the book didn't stick with them. Bastard children, all them. And bastardized swings. For all of it's faults, at least the book had that going for it and therein lies the real contribution of someone like a Homer Kelley. Keep carrying things forward. We're all learning here and for that I'm very thankful.

 

[lia41985]

Brain discussed getting taught by Neal in a lesson that combined these two tools (launch monitor and kinematic sequence analysis machine). Sounds awesome. Look at this nugget:

I have talked to Cheetham before on the phone.

I met Neal at the MIT Summit in Cambridge, Mass.

As far as the theory goes, I guess I better "publish" it right here, right now, just in case someone else claims it.

In my opinion, the orientation of the 3-D machine should be 90° to the Horizontal Swing Plane (Plane Line, Direction of Swing) and NOT 90° to the target.

For example:

If Charles Howell hits 8° down on his driver at 45°, and Paula Creamer hits up 8° at 45°, then Howell would have to rotate his Horizontal Swing Plane-Plane Line-Direction of Swing 8° to the left to hit a straight ball with a square clubface at separation, and Creamer would have to rotate her Horizontal Swing Plane-Plane Line-Direction of Swing 8° to the right to hit a straight ball with a square clubface at separation.

Then, if both Howell and Creamer had IDENTICAL OPEN SHOULDERS that are 35° open to their Horizontal Swing Plane-Plane Line-Direction, the TARGET LINE ORIENTED 3-D machine would have Howell's shoulders about 43° open and Creamers only 27°!!!

And that would NOT be what they are actually doing.

You see.